“interest u/s 234A”

InterestSection 234ASection 234A1,483 judgments

The decision most relied on for interest u/s 234A is CIT v. Ranchi Club Ltd. (247 ITR 209), cited in 21 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on interest u/s 234A

CIT v. Ranchi Club Ltd.

247 ITR 209 · 2001 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Interest under sections 234A and 234B cannot be levied mechanically when there is a reasonable cause for delay in payment or response to notices.

ACIT v. Hans Raj Gandhi

37 ITR 418 · Reported

citing judgments

An assessee is entitled to the adjustment of seized cash against their advance tax liability. Consequently, no interest under sections 234A or 234B can be charged if the department fails to respond to the assessee's request for such an adjustment.

Judgments citing interest u/s 234A

Late Mr.Bezwada Venkatram Reddy (Rep by Legal Heir Smt.B.Kamakshi), Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AYs 2006-07 to 2010-2011

ITA 951/CHNY/2022[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2006-2007

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.951/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.952/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.953/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.954/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.955/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.956/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. B.Kamakshi Dcit [L/H Of Shri Bezwada Venkatram Central Circle -3(4), Reddy (Deceased)] Chennai. बनाम/ Vs. Flat F3, Prakruthi Apartments, 20, Dr.Ranga Road, Mylapore Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Agdpb-3601-R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna (CIT)-Ld. DR

Section 153ASection 234A

explanation provided by the appellant. 3. For that the Learned commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the consequential levy of interest u/s 234A & B of the Act. 1.4 The grounds taken by the revenue in AY 2006-07 read as under: - 1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred

M/S. Methods India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, this issue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 475/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, Addl. CIT(DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 36Section 36(1)(v)

Without prejudice to the right to seek waiver with the Hon'ble CCIT/DG the appellant denies himself liable to be charged to interest u/s 234A. 234B and 234C of the Act, as computed in the intimation u/s.143[1]/154 of the Act, which under the facts and in the circumstances

Salesforce.Com Singapore Pte Ltd, Singapore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation Circle-3(1)(2), Delhi, New Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3347/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh: A.Y. 2018-19 : A.Y. 2019-20 : A.Y. 2020-21

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vii)

only on the returned income. 9 ITA nos. 1923, 1924/Del/2022; & 1789 & 3347/Del/2023 6. In ground no. 9 the assessee has challenged levy of interest u/s 234A of the Act. 6.1 We have heard the parties and perused the materials on record. It is the case of the assessee that without

Sukh Darshan Singh, Delhi vs. ITO Ward.43(2), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2233/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 54F

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sukh Darshan Singh

Saleforce.Com Singapore Pte Ltd, Singapore vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2) Int, Taxation, New Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1789/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh: A.Y. 2018-19 : A.Y. 2019-20 : A.Y. 2020-21

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vii)

Selesforce.Com Singapure Pte Ltd., Singapure vs. ACIT International Taxation, Circle-3(1)(2), New Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1924/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh: A.Y. 2018-19 : A.Y. 2019-20 : A.Y. 2020-21

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vii)

Salesforce.Com Singapore Pte Ltd, Karnataka vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1923/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh: A.Y. 2018-19 : A.Y. 2019-20 : A.Y. 2020-21

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vii)

Vinayak Shivaji Kand, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 12(3), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 388/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: the filing of appeal and challan for the same was uploaded with the appeal. Further, both the payments are reflecting in Form 26AS. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) is erred in treating Rs.1,00,00,000/- as an unexplained investment u/s 69. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) is erred in treating Rs.6,00,000/- as an unexplained investment u/s 69. 4. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A)

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 250Section 69

Surcharge and Cess (D3+D4+D5) 23369 D7. Relief u/s 89 0 D8. Balance Tax after Relief (D6-D7) 23369 D9. Total Interest u/s 234A 10252 D10. Total Interest u/s 234B 11417 D11. Total Interest u/s 234C 233 D12. Fees U/S 234F 10000 D13. Total Tax, Fee and Interest

Aurum Grande Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, Kanjurmarg - Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4412/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhriaurum Grande Co- Vs. Income-Tax Department, Operative Housing National Faceless Appeal, Society Ltd. Centre, Delhi Cts No. 1293, 1- 5,/30/7&675 Village Kuanjur Road, Kanjurmrg East Mumbai-400042 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No:Aafaa2092L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Sukhsagar SyalFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 153(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 80P(2)(d)

circumstances of the case and in law, the assessee having filed its return of income within the time limit prescribed, the levy of interest u/s. 234A of the Act of Rs 39,944 is erroneous and ought to be deleted. 7) On the facts and in the circumstances ... case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer not having given any direction in the assessment order to charge interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of P a g e | 3 AY 2020-21 Aurum Grande Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. the Act, the levy of interest under these sections

Dreamz Infrastructure, Amravati vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 48/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 144Section 234ASection 250Section 44ASection 68

reasonable opportunity of being heard and without considering the appellant's submission and documents - evidences submitted before him. 8. That the charging of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C & 234F is not proper, unjust and deserves to be cancelled. 9. That any other ground/s that may be raised at the time

Amit Kumar Bhati, Haryana vs. ITO Ward-3(4), Gurgaon

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6011/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Yr: 2010-11

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of Income Tax Act, 1961. 7. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds

Arathi Vinay Patil, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3)(4), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 604/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 44ASection 80Section 801ASection 80I

deduction as claimed by the appellant is to be granted to the appellant. 6. The appellant denies the liability to pay Interest u/s 234A&234B, 234C and 234F of the Act. The interest having been levied erroneously is to be deleted. 7. In view of the above and on other

Marsh India Insurance Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/Asstt/CIT/ITO/NFAC, Delhi

In the result, both the appeal

ITA 642/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 Marsh India Insurance Brokers Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Private Limited, Commissioner Of Income 1201-02, Tower, One India Vs. Tax/Income-Tax Officer, National Bulls Centre, Jupiter Mills E-Assessment Centre, Delhi. Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road (West), Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aadcm 4220 G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Madhur Agrawal Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 234ASection 234B

appeal is related to levy of interest u/s The ground No. 3 of the appeal is related to levy of interest u/s 234A of the Act amounting to Rs.24,96,100/ 234A of the Act amounting to Rs.24,96,100/-. The Ld. counsel for . The Ld. counsel for the assessee ... return of income within limitation prescribed under law within limitation prescribed under law and therefore, not liable for and therefore, not liable for interest u/s 234A of the interest u/s 234A of the Income-tax Act ( in short the ‘ tax Act ( in short the ‘Act’). We find that a detailed

Marsh India Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl /Jtdy/ACIT/ITO/NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal

ITA 2471/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 234ASection 234B

Maruti Sadashiv Dhanavade, Kolhapur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Kolhapur

Appeal is partly allowed in above

ITA 538/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Kalpeshkumar Rupavatiya

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 234ASection 68

sec.115BBE. 5. Lower authorities have erred in charging Interest u/s.234A & 234B. Appellant prays for deletion of the same. 6. Appellant denies liability to Interest u/s 234A & 234B on said addition. 7. Appellant prays to add, alter, amend, take additional grounds, submit additional evidence, and/or withdraw the ground/s, during appellate Proceedings

Mangal Singh, Sadarpur Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for

ITA 863/DEL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: him, therefore, proceeded to make the assessment u/s 144 r. w. section 147 of the Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short). Further, he agreed that several opportunities were given by the Ld. CIT(A) as well and assessee could not represent his case due to non-receipt of the notices, however, he submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has proceeded to dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in limine without deciding the issue on merits. He submitted that the assessee has not proved the source of cash depos

Section 144Section 147Section 234A

erred in law and on facts of the case in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act 5. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time

Kutchi Sarvodaya Nagar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions) - 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4127/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailkutchi Sarvodaya Nagar Vs. Income Tax Officer P.L. Lokhande Marg, (Exemptions)-1(4) Near Narayan Guru High Piramal Chambers, School, Govandi, Lal Baug, Parel, Mumbai – 400043 Mumbai - 400012 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatk0678E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Pradip Kapasi Respondent By : P.D. Chougule Date Of Hearing 22.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 03.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac For A.Y. 2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “I. Ground No. 1: Failure To Issue Notice U/S. 250 The Id. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Failing To Issue Notice For Furnishing Written Submissions And/Or Hearing Of Appeal As Required U/S 250(1), (2) & (6B) Read With The Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021 Issued Under Notification No 139/2021 Dt 28.12.2021 Of The Act & In Particular Not Allowing The Appellant To Furnish Its Submissions. Your Appellant Prays That An Order Passed Without Issuing Notice U/S. 250 Be Quashed Ii Ground No. 2: Failure To Give Opportunity Of Hearing By Cit(A) The Id. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Passing An Order In Appeal Without Giving An Opportunity Of Hearing, Orally Or Virtually, As Required By The Provisions Of The Act. Rules, Scheme, Notifications & Circulars & The Decisions Of The Courts & In Particular The Decision In The Cases Of Ba Continuum India (P.) Ltd., 125 Taxmann.Com 180 (Bom.) & Sanjay Aggarwal, 127 Taxmann.Com

For Appellant: Pradip KapasiFor Respondent: P.D. Chougule

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234ASection 234BSection 246ASection 250Section 250(1)

payable by the assessee charitable trust. Your appellant pleads that the levy of surcharge be deleted. VII. GROUND NO. 7: LEVY OF INTEREST U/S. 234A OF RS. 1,09,736/- AND U/S. 234B OF RS. 46,08,912/- The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming ... action of the AO of levying interest u/s 234A of Rs.1,09,736/- and u/s. 234B of RS. 46,08.912/- in rectification proceedings. Your appellants denies any liability to payment of interest and also submits that no interest u/s 234A and 234B for the period post assessment u/s

Radisson Hotels International Incorporated, Usa vs. ACIT Circle 3(1)(1) Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2382/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Ms. Deepika PasrichaFor Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 244ASection 270ASection 9(1)(vii)

Clause 17 of the Final Assessment Order 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) dated 27.06.2023) and levying the surcharge and cess accordingly. 8.2. Levying interest u/s 234A of the Act, without appreciating that the return for AY 2020- 21 was furnished within due date. 8.3. Levying interest u/s section 234B

Radheshyam Meena, Rajgarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Alwar

9. In view of the discussion and reasons recorded above, in the interest of justice, we hereby allow the appeal for statistical purposes, set aside the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A)

ITA 306/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Hanuman Singh (Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik ( CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

para 5 above): Rs. 5,85,59,424/- Assessed income : Rs. 5,85,59,424/- Allow credit of prepaid taxes after proper verification. Interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C is charged as per law, as applicable in Assessee’s case. Issue notice of demand and challan accordingly.” Since Assessing Officer

Kailash Chander Jat, Shrimadhopur vs. ITO Ward4(3), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for

ITA 242/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 May 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.)

Section 115BSection 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234ASection 69A

vs.ITO 4. The Id. AO has grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging the interest u/s 234A, B,C. The interest so charged is being totally contrary to the provision of law and on facts of the case and hence same